Athanasios I Tsirikos1, Andrew D Duckworth2, Lindsay E Henderson2, Ciara Michaelson2. 1. Scottish National Spine Deformity Centre, Royal Hospital for Sick Children, Edinburgh, United Kingdom, atsirikos@hotmail.com. 2. Scottish National Spine Deformity Centre, Royal Hospital for Sick Children, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study aims to present the diagnostic characteristics of multimodal intraoperative monitoring (IOM) in spinal deformity surgery and to define and categorise the neuromonitoring events, as well as propose an algorithm of action. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We reviewed 1,155 consecutive patients (807 female, 348 male) who underwent deformity correction using standardised perioperative care, cortical/cervical somatosensory evoked potentials (SSEPs), and upper/lower limb transcranial electrical motor evoked potential (MEPs) by a single surgeon. The mean age at surgery was 13.8 years (range 10-23.3). We categorised IOM events as true, transient true, and false positive or negative. Diagnostic performance criteria were calculated. RESULTS: The most common diagnosis was adolescent idiopathic scoliosis in 717 (62%) patients. We identified 3 true positive monitoring events occurring in 2 patients (0.17%), 8 transient true positive (0.69%), and 8 transient false positive events (0.69%). There were no false negative events and no patient had postoperative neurological complications. The multimodal IOM technique had a sensitivity of 100%, specificity of 99.3%, positive predictive value of 55.6%, and negative predictive value of 100%. Sensitivity was 100% for MEPs and multimodal monitoring compared to 20% for cortical or cervical SSEPs. The frequency of true or transient true positive events was higher (p = 0.07) in Scheuermann's kyphosis (3/91 patients, 3.3%) compared to adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (6/717 patients, 0.84%). CONCLUSION: Multimodal IOM is highly sensitive and specific for spinal cord injury. This technique is reliable for the assessment of the condition of the spinal cord during major deformity surgery. We propose an algorithm of intraoperative action to allow close cooperation between the surgical, anaesthetic, and neurophysiology teams and to prevent neurological deficits.
OBJECTIVE: This study aims to present the diagnostic characteristics of multimodal intraoperative monitoring (IOM) in spinal deformity surgery and to define and categorise the neuromonitoring events, as well as propose an algorithm of action. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We reviewed 1,155 consecutive patients (807 female, 348 male) who underwent deformity correction using standardised perioperative care, cortical/cervical somatosensory evoked potentials (SSEPs), and upper/lower limb transcranial electrical motor evoked potential (MEPs) by a single surgeon. The mean age at surgery was 13.8 years (range 10-23.3). We categorised IOM events as true, transient true, and false positive or negative. Diagnostic performance criteria were calculated. RESULTS: The most common diagnosis was adolescent idiopathic scoliosis in 717 (62%) patients. We identified 3 true positive monitoring events occurring in 2 patients (0.17%), 8 transient true positive (0.69%), and 8 transient false positive events (0.69%). There were no false negative events and no patient had postoperative neurological complications. The multimodal IOM technique had a sensitivity of 100%, specificity of 99.3%, positive predictive value of 55.6%, and negative predictive value of 100%. Sensitivity was 100% for MEPs and multimodal monitoring compared to 20% for cortical or cervical SSEPs. The frequency of true or transient true positive events was higher (p = 0.07) in Scheuermann's kyphosis (3/91 patients, 3.3%) compared to adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (6/717 patients, 0.84%). CONCLUSION: Multimodal IOM is highly sensitive and specific for spinal cord injury. This technique is reliable for the assessment of the condition of the spinal cord during major deformity surgery. We propose an algorithm of intraoperative action to allow close cooperation between the surgical, anaesthetic, and neurophysiology teams and to prevent neurological deficits.
Authors: M R Nuwer; R G Emerson; G Galloway; A D Legatt; J Lopez; R Minahan; T Yamada; D S Goodin; C Armon; V Chaudhry; G S Gronseth; C L Harden Journal: Neurology Date: 2012-02-21 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: D Kojo Hamilton; Justin S Smith; Charles A Sansur; Steven D Glassman; Christopher P Ames; Sigurd H Berven; David W Polly; Joseph H Perra; Dennis Raymond Knapp; Oheneba Boachie-Adjei; Richard E McCarthy; Christopher I Shaffrey Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 2011-07-01 Impact factor: 3.468
Authors: Pinar Yalinay Dikmen; Matthew F Halsey; Altug Yucekul; Marinus de Kleuver; Lloyd Hey; Peter O Newton; Irem Havlucu; Tais Zulemyan; Caglar Yilgor; Ahmet Alanay Journal: Spine Deform Date: 2020-11-23